TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (1) TMI 704
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....puty Advocate-General ORDER :- Heard finally. This writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed to quash order of penalty Rs. 2,03,830 imposed by assessing officer dated October 4, 2004 vide annexure P6, under section 69(2) of the M.P. Commercial Tax Act, 1994. In brief the facts of the case are that the petitioner is registered dealer under the provision of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....section 69 of the M.P. Commercial Tax Act, 1994 separate proceeding were ordered to be initiated. On October 4, 2004, the assessing officer, i.e., respondent No. 1 had initiated the penalty proceedings under section 69(2) of the M.P. Commercial Tax Act, and Rs. 2,03,830 as penalty was imposed. The petitioner had preferred a revision before respondent No. 2, and submitted that against the original....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hus: ". . . Penalty under section 43(1) can be imposed on an assessee only if the assessing authority is satisfied that the assessee has deliberately concealed his turnover or furnished a false return; and that too only after giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity of being heard. The proceedings under section 43(1) being penal proceedings, the burden of proving the essential ingredients for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... authority disregarded all these principles. The assessing authority all along proceeded on the basis that it was for the petitioner to prove his innocence and not for the Department to prove the guilt; and that the finding reached by him in the assessment proceedings about the concealment of turnover and submission of false returns concluded the matter. Thus, the order of penalty passed by the as....